Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ask Slashdot: What Will IT Departments Look Like In 5 Years?

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the i'll-know-IT-when-i-see-IT dept.

IT 184

Lucas123 writes "As consumerization of IT and self-service trends becomes part and parcel of everyone's work in the enterprise, the corporate data center may be left behind and IT departments may be given over to business units as consultants and integrators. 'The business itself will be the IT department. [Technologists] will simply be the enabler,' said Brandon Porco, chief technologist & solutions architect at Northrop Grumman. Porco was part of a four-person panel of technologists who participated at a town hall-style meeting at the CITE Conference and Expo in San Francisco this week. The panel was united on the topic of the future of IT shops. Others said they are not sure how to address a growing generation gap between young and veteran workers, each of whom are comfortable with different technologies. Nathan McBride, vice president of IT & chief cloud architect at AMAG Pharmaceuticals, said he's often forced to deal with older IT workers coming on board who expect his company to support traditional email like Outlook when it uses Google Apps.' Sooner or later, IT departments are going to change. When do you think that will happen, and how will they be different?"

cancel ×

184 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The same (5, Insightful)

thechemic (1329333) | about a year ago | (#43939189)

We still support systems that are going on 30 years old. What's the big deal about 5 years from now? Is this question being asked by the same people that predicted flying cars would happen years ago?

Re:The same (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939303)

Same as today. Headed by the clueless, aimlessly jumping from one bandwagon to the next, time/budget overruns in midless projects, always being kept busy, prevented from being productive.

Re:The same (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939397)

It ill be the same, but instead Java 6 we ill be using Java 8.

Re:The same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940125)

How progressive - I'll be using Java 7 instead of Java 5.

Re:The same (1)

ttucker (2884057) | about a year ago | (#43940233)

How progressive - I'll be using Java 7 instead of Java 5.

Jump on the bandwagon man, closures running on the GPU!

Re:The same (5, Insightful)

mlts (1038732) | about a year ago | (#43939499)

Breaking it down:

Server rooms will remain the same, except we might have aisles with a wider rack size from 19 inch to 21 inch or Facebook's OpenRack spec of 537mm. Of course, there will be metal adapters available so the existing 19 inch stuff can be racked in the wider racks.

Companies don't change that much. IT will still be IT, and Dilbert will hold true.

Some E-mail will move to Google. Most will still remain on Exchange due to momentum, regulations requiring physical location of sensitive data, and the fact that Exchange does work and work well, so it will remain in corporations until something better comes along.

We will still be using AD or LDAP. Since most places have all their eggs in those baskets, it will be almost impossible for them to move to any other core authentication/authorization mechanism.

We will be running the same certificate treadmills for Windows Server 2018 and Windows Server 2020 as we do for Windows Server 2012.

There will be fewer discrete computers in the server room racks, as companies move to larger scale rack/blade farms. Plus, a blade/enclosure setup offers an advantage in the CPU/watt statistics.

Technologies like autotiering will become similar to RAID 5 and 6 -- part of almost any disk controller, so one can have both SSD and spindles, and the controller will figure out where data goes by itself.

All and all, IT won't change much. We will have newer and faster stuff occupying the racks, but it won't be a major jump like moving from machines with their own disk arrays to a centralized SAN like we did 5-6 years ago.

Re:The same (1)

swillden (191260) | about a year ago | (#43939535)

No movement to outsource the management of the machines to outside cloud services? That may or may not happen where you are, but there's a lot of it going on, and it invalidates much of your list.

Re:The same (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939597)

You know, not everyone can outsource to The Cloud *thunder noise*. Eventually someone is going to have to physically have servers in their building. . . .

Re:The same (3)

FaxeTheCat (1394763) | about a year ago | (#43939693)

There is probably a lot going on in the SMB area. Where I work, that kind of thing is not even discussed.
I it comes up, two words are uttered: Data security. End of discussion.

Re:The same (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | about a year ago | (#43939781)

No movement to outsource the management of the machines to outside cloud services?

Of course there will be.

And there will be the opposite where things that were moved "to the cloud" are being brought "in house".

It's the beautiful cycle of IT.
Outsource to save money.
Insource to provide reliability/accountability.
Repeat.

That may or may not happen where you are, but there's a lot of it going on, and it invalidates much of your list.

It depends upon which part of the cycle the company is on.

Remember that CIO's do not get credit for "maintaining the status quo". They have to identify and "fix" a "problem".

Accounting servers are expensive and techs to maintain them cost too much. Move it all to the vendor's "cloud".

Can't write paychecks because someone is DDOS'ing that vendor or the ISP flooded or a backhoe cut the fiber? Better bring it in house.

Re:The same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940203)

Quite possibly one of the most insightful comments I've ever read on Slashdot. All the young whippersnappers who are still blissfully naive and optimistic need to read and internalize this.

Re:The same (5, Interesting)

David_Hart (1184661) | about a year ago | (#43939809)

No movement to outsource the management of the machines to outside cloud services? That may or may not happen where you are, but there's a lot of it going on, and it invalidates much of your list.

Your statement is a tad Naive. Do you truly think that the majority of services are going to the cloud? Only an idiot would trust the cloud with their corporate crown jewels. My opinion is that most companies will end up with a mix of services. But... Hey... What's new?

Where I work we are building our own internal cloud services, not outsourcing. Part of that may have to do with the fact that we are a large Biotech company and have various regulations that we have to comply with. Most cloud services, in my opinion, are being used by small to mid-size companies who do not have the economies of scale to run an IT department. Most large companies will use some cloud services but it's highly unlikely that they will trust cloud services with their crown jewels.

The point is that there will be a mixture of services that will need to be supported by IT....

Re:The same (1)

asliarun (636603) | about a year ago | (#43940237)

No movement to outsource the management of the machines to outside cloud services? That may or may not happen where you are, but there's a lot of it going on, and it invalidates much of your list.

Your statement is a tad Naive. Do you truly think that the majority of services are going to the cloud? Only an idiot would trust the cloud with their corporate crown jewels. My opinion is that most companies will end up with a mix of services. But... Hey... What's new?

Where I work we are building our own internal cloud services, not outsourcing. Part of that may have to do with the fact that we are a large Biotech company and have various regulations that we have to comply with. Most cloud services, in my opinion, are being used by small to mid-size companies who do not have the economies of scale to run an IT department. Most large companies will use some cloud services but it's highly unlikely that they will trust cloud services with their crown jewels.

The point is that there will be a mixture of services that will need to be supported by IT....

I used to think so too, but don't any more. Look at Salesforce.com. If most of Fortune 500 companies are willing to trust their front-end business - i.e. sales - i.e. the stuff that brings in money and runs the rest of the company - to Salesforce.com, I'm not sure why they would have an issue with other data that is piddly in comparison.

The *real* reason why the entire IT backend has not gone the cloud way is simply that other cloud based providers have not been able to create a platform like Salesforce. A platform that is customizable, extensible, scalable, can give good performance, has good security in place, has ready-made and relevant tools, has a good developer base. And I'm talking about corporate functions like HR, finance, payroll, supply chain, manufacturing, internal communication, marketing, etc.

I know it is a buzzword but I see PaaS as the future. Generic platforms like Azure can be made to work, yes, but the killer platforms are ones that are focused on solving specific problems. Once this starts happening, and it will, IT as you know it, will no longer exist.

Corporate IT will become more like IT in web shops - it will be about configuration management, deployment, managing virtual infrastructure, scripting and automation, monitoring, etc. And it will be about development and scripting.

Just my thoughts though. I could be wrong.

Re:The same (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43940323)

So who does Salesforce outsource to?
At some point there has to be servers in racks, it can't be cloud all the way down.

IT today is about configuration management, deployment and managing virtual and real infrastructure, scripting automation etc. You just described my day.

Re:The same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940401)

I think marketing ties into sales, and there are several marketing tools you can buy as add-ons for Salesforce. In fact there are many different things you can push into Salesforce even outside of the sales/marketing domain. You can do ERP, customer service, ticketing, and all sorts of things in there. I'm not really convinced it does a great job of those things, but our company has invested millions into making it work for our business. Yeah, they're generally really reliable and low-latency (though I've seen some horrible latency spikes with SFDC but that's infrequent).

Workday provides HR SaaS in the cloud. My company uses it and it's pretty good. The only complaint I have about it is that the UI is a bit clunky and is dependent on Flash. Otherwise though it's far better than the garbage we used to use from ADP and Ceridian in the years past.

We use Oracle for finance, supply chain, and other miscellaneous business process. Oracle does a lot of things, but I'm very unimpressed with it, at least from an interface standpoint. Oracle is stuck in the 90's with their interfaces. There isn't much competition in the market right now - you're either on Oracle or SAP or you're using a bunch of smaller suites from several different vendors. We've dumped millions of dollars into Oracle consulting - apparently Oracle is not ready to use out of the box; you have to hire a team of developers to study your business processes and then write out tons of code, SQL, and scripts to suit your needs. Then, and only then, can you use Oracle!

If some company could come in and make a hosted Web 2.0 competitor for Oracle that was easily customizable and didn't require (as many) teams of expensive consultants to implement, it would probably be the next killer app for enterprises.

Re:The same (2)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#43939953)

That's because he knows that by then, the cloud fad will be replaced with the insource fad. Don't wrooy, soon after we'll have 'the cloud' again, it'll just have a shiney new name.

Re:The same (1)

Junta (36770) | about a year ago | (#43940359)

And it can come back just as quickly and easily. I'll use AWS as a shortcut because I'm lazy and it is representative of the wider market.

For smaller businesses, AWS does have economies of scale that ease significant portions of the cost. These businesses mostly have quite fragile IT services and moving them to AWS in a naive way is no big loss. With a marginal amount of skill, they can even gain some significant gain in robustness due to ease of getting instances in distinct availability zones. They still won't be 'enterprise grade', but still.

For larger businesses, they bring their own economies of scale. In this case, to do it just like AWS does it, it is necessarily possible to do it cheaper than AWS (AWS is after all, a for profit endeavor). This is not to say a business should not pay attention to AWS and size it, as it is a good indication of whether they are doing things right or not. If AWS *is* cheaper than internal IT, that org should look inward and understand why they are more expensive as a break-even endeavor than an external company is at a for-profit endeavor. It could be that Amazon is doing things that they can't consider (e.g. letting instances fall over pretty easily). It could be that the company should consider doing certain things more like Amazon. It could also be that they assume cost reductions that won't be realized (e.g. work that will still need to be tended to in-house on the external instances. The company may incur increase costs/skills needs to accomodate the AWS model. As an example of the last, looking at netflix's technical blog, it's clear they have more skills than the average enterprise IT shop. They seem to have to work pretty hard to keep their infrastructure working as it does. Despite that skillset, netflix pretty commonly locks out an individual client, or fails to kick off a video. They also seem to have at least one or two multi-hour total outages in a given year due to AWS failing in some way that even their design cannot tolerate.

Re:The same (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43940041)

Server rooms will look pretty much the same, but they'll be larger, serve multiple companies, and only the smallest companies will have their own machines onsite.

IT will still be IT, except experience will be hard to come by (and expensive) and Dilbert will have a 3rd world accent.

Exchange in "the cloud". All the disadvantages of Exchange plus all the disadvantages of internet-based services, plus all the disadvantages of offshore admin.

A/D in the cloud. See above. Three weeks to get someone added to an A/D group.

Certificate treadmills -- agreed.

Migration to virtualization/blades, check.

Autotiering plus offshore, not-totally-engaged admins equals nobody knows where the data actually resides, or what hardware it touches. (We had an issue just this morning where it was discovered that key development data resided on hardware that "slipped through the cracks" and was not supported either by the offshore admins nor by the company. Discovered it when it stopped working.)

All in all, IT hardware will become more centralized, management/planning/administration will be suppressed by cost issues to operator levels, and we'll all long for the days of Dilbert.

Just sayin'.

Ten - fifteen years from now: Small companies with agile, cost-effective, local IT departments will succeed while massive companies buying IT as a service will generally fail. Some of those small companies will be seduced by outsource salescreatures, will throw away their core competency, and go out of business. The ones who do not do this will thrive.

Re:The same (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43940093)

Oh, and the first large internet infrastructure outage will prevent a large number of companies from doing business, even internally, even companies who don't depend on a web presence to do business. People who question the logic of this setup will be banished to the basement and their red stapler taken away. At the second large internet infrastructure outage, the same thing will happen. And the third.

Re:The same (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940275)

A lot of companies are skeptical of the cloud hype. The CIO bean counters look at the costs and the benefits and don't see an advantage. Cloud right now makes a lot more sense for smaller companies but it scales very poorly once you go into the larger enterprise for many reasons.

We looked into a hosted Exchange solution and there was very little cost savings for us and the SLA was terrible. The (unnamed vendor) worded their SLA in such a way that they would not define an outage the same thing that most normal people would consider an outage. This was one of the cheaper vendors. Other vendors had better SLAs, but were obscenely expensive.

It's cheaper and more reliable for us to continue running our Exchange cluster with one admin who does a pretty good job of keeping it online (believe it or not, we manage four to five nines most years). I imagine this applies to any number of corporate systems that are at the heart of your business.

If you're a smaller company, a hosted solution would probably be acceptable, and up to a certain point, would be cheaper. There is a threshold somewhere, and I'm not exactly sure where it is, where the costs of hiring in-house admins, server/storage, and licenses cost less than a hosted solution.

5 years is a big deal if you're in your 20s (5, Insightful)

Viol8 (599362) | about a year ago | (#43939649)

Not so much if you're somewhat older and you've seen the IT wheel turn more than a few times and come back to where it started.

Re:5 years is a big deal if you're in your 20s (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43940363)

This.
Today we are all going back to virtual desktops and in 5-10 people will want real desktops, then back again. The wheel keeps on turning.

Re:The same (1)

homey of my owney (975234) | about a year ago | (#43940013)

Was this inane question posed by Bennett Haselton [slashdot.org] ?

Re:The same (5, Interesting)

ElVee (208723) | about a year ago | (#43940067)

We're still running COBOL code from the 70's. Probably 600k lines of it all told, which is down from over a million lines around Y2K. It's all boring financial stuff, but utterly essential.

I'm a greyhair now, but I was in junior high school when this system first went online. The names at the top of the change log have been dead and buried for 20+ years. The names in the middle retired right after Y2k. The names at the bottom are all 55+ years old. COBOL coders are worth their weight in gold these days, but getting any to stick around for more than a year has been difficult. COBOL contractors can ALWAYS make substantially more money somewhere else.

The cost to analyze the codebase and build a replacement will cost a frikkin' huge fortune. Thus, I suspect the company will continue to run this same code long after my name has moved to the top of the change log and I've been archived on that big DASD in the sky.

Turtles (4, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | about a year ago | (#43939213)

all the way down.

Re:Turtles (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43939315)

Surely there's a rat at the bottom of the pile.

Re:Turtles (2)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about a year ago | (#43939501)

Surely there's a rat at the bottom of the pile.

Not if it's the steaming pile we've become accustomed to. The rats are on top...

Re:Turtles (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939733)

Riot gear and LART all the way up.

chief cloud architect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939225)

Someone that signs up for google professional accounts. Whoop fucking do!

Nice they we know his company's entire communications is available to the US government, and any other "law" agency. Won't be long until an underling will be selling secrets, or hacked by a rival via an overseas network.

If you start a summary with this: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939231)

"As consumerization of IT and self-service trends becomes part and parcel of everyone's work in the enterprise..."

Then nobody will ready whatever comes after it... just fyi...

Hey, you, get off of my cloud! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939269)

There are IT departments and there are IT departments.

The 'pretend' IT departments that shouldn't have existed in the first place and are all caught up in the 'cloud' and 'trends' will become something new because they never should have existed in the first place.

The 'real' IT departments will carry on lifting the heavy loads and making data work, as they have been since the days of COBOL and punched cards.

From the way young pups talk you'd think computers were just invented in the last 5 years.

Now get off of my cloud.

Re:Hey, you, get off of my cloud! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939555)

Total douche

Re:Hey, you, get off of my cloud! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939743)

Total douche?

That guy (or gal) is f*%$!ng right! "You" know nothing!

Now, GomL! Arghhhh!

I have the answer! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939277)

Sooner or later, IT departments are going to change. When do you think that will happen, and how will they be different?"

*Shakes Magic 8 ball*

"Reply hazy try again"

Well, there you have it.

Everything old.... (5, Informative)

jeauxkewl (1465425) | about a year ago | (#43939305)

... is new again. I've been centralized and decentralized multiple times. I swear, some people make a good living pushing the beans back and forth across the table and declaring victory. There will always be economies of scale for centralization of shared services and there will always be techies with some level of intimacy with the business to support their applications and communicate requirements. The fact that self-service IT continues to grow simply reinforces the need for champions/advocates at the business level that help requesters pick and choose their products from a service catalog. At the end of the day, Joe User couldn't care less where his services reside.

Re:Everything old.... (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#43939537)

... is new again. I've been centralized and decentralized multiple times.

This.

I once worked for a big company where all the bottom-rung departments were buying PCs and writing software to automate their work, while top-rung management was building a palace to house the new super-sized mainframe that was going to do everything for everyone. (And everyone was going to like it, whether they like it or not.)

I swear, some people make a good living pushing the beans back and forth across the table and declaring victory.

Ah, I always wondered what the B in MBA stood for.

Re:Everything old.... (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#43939635)

This is the trick. Users want discrete computers (PCs, tablets, etc) so they can have enough control to get their work done. Management wants everything centralized so they know what everyone's doing and have control over them (frequently control they don't need.). The mainframe is a (still living) nightmare of usability , cost, and lock-in, although with Linux now available it's getting better in the usability department. 'Head office' will continue to try an control how people get their work done, but in the end they won't be able to stop them. Hopefully, with the centralized web APIs (REST, etc), we can have the best of both worlds, but I think it will take longer than 5 years. People hate giving up control, and central purchasing agencies get all sorts of perks (bribes) from suppliers at the corporate level.

Re:Everything old.... (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#43940033)

'Head office' will continue to try an control how people get their work done

I suspect that that extends far beyond the use of computing devices.

Re:Everything old.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939837)

Ah, I always wondered what the B in MBA stood for.

Move
Beans
Aimlessly

Re:Everything old.... (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#43940027)

Thanks. I thought of Move, but couldn't think of anything for the 'A'.

Also, it's a very good definition!

Re: Everything old.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940133)

Again
Across
Albatross

Re:Everything old.... (1)

jeauxkewl (1465425) | about a year ago | (#43940399)

Move Beans Aimlessly

^^ THIS.... I'll need to enter this in our TLA library. You'll hear it again one of these days.

Re:Everything old.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939545)

" Joe User couldn't care less where his services reside."

I dsiagree with this. If his service resides and is owned by the centralized it group, then there will likely be a formal support system that he will have to go through to get an issue looked at. And chances are, the first person in centralized IT he speaks to, knows little or nothing about business need driving the issue.

On the other hand, with decentralized IT, his direct line of support is likely working along side of the user and knows the business needs and can speak on the same level as the user.

That is the key to why Joe user cares where his services reside.

Re:Everything old.... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43940403)

You can have both you know.

IT that works with users, but is managed by IT. Not sure how well that works in megacorps, but seems fine from where I stand. The best part is then he can be moved around to where he is needed and is not sitting idle just because he is technically dept A headcount and Dept A does not need him this moment, but will not let him work for Dept B.

Shattered (5, Insightful)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | about a year ago | (#43939327)

IT is already being shattered. But don't assume this is a good thing. All thats actually happening is massive damage, loss of control, and data being islanded. Whole departments and even orgs will spin out and data spiral arms will spin out.

The primary old school reasons for IT departments - these still exist. You might well think regulation, and compliance have simply gone away. They haven't, they just got forgotten.

One thing being forgotten, is that IT has always been capable of game changing. Always. But what you find is this is usually killed by lack of funding, and by severe red tape. The idea that end around onto the nearest cloud makes you fast moving - is true. But its also usually arbitrary, and outside of operational agreement in many cases.

People assuming that everyone on BYOD and every device under the sum being an out of control compromised, un policied device as a good thing. It will be, for a short time. Until the damage happens.

As for older techs who don't or cant stay up to speed - whats new? Thats not a new IT problem. Thats ever present. Part of the idea of google docs is that to a greater degree - you don't need IT..(at least thats the theory... )

Re:Shattered (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#43939665)

Data islands doesn't have to mean loss of control. When you have different regulations and compliance requirements, it's actually a good thing. It makes also makes it easier to change technologies, process, procedures, etc, for one area of business data without the normal 'everything or nothing, meaning nothing' change processes that most IT shops are famous for.

Re:Shattered (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about a year ago | (#43939797)

I think we'll actually move close to the past here in another 5 years. I see a lot of this love affair with cloud services dropping off after it finally sinks in just how expensive it can be for the companies. Everything is a cycle, and IT is no different. Our technologies change (or sometimes just the names), but the need is always there. Until SkyNet anyway.

Re:Shattered (1)

tqk (413719) | about a year ago | (#43940325)

As for older techs who don't or cant stay up to speed - whats new?

You know that's a stereotype? How's about we wonder about green fresh out of school techs who believe email is obsolete tech and Facebook & Twitter are the bleeding edge? There's plenty of very long in the tooth tech out there that's never worked better, and there's a lot of new guys who think email's just that thing that fills itself with spam and malware; wouldn't use it if a wolverine was gnawing off their leg. Laptops/Desktops vs. smartphones?

The problem with these expert panels is (1)

bussdriver (620565) | about a year ago | (#43940435)

They tend to get people for the panels who think in a similar fashion. The 1 person who organizes the speakers can easily fail to find or even recognize the full range of diversity of experts - plus they have to actually show up. Some will go into a herd mentality on topics that they don't feel as strongly about VS the credentials of the others.

To the MBAs running business, IT is a resented burden that adds OVERHEAD. This opinion is near universal at this point. The building janitors are in the same boat but they cost less and when robotics gets better... out go the janitors! (if not already replaced with illegal immigrants on the excuse that "Natives don't want THOSE jobs.")

Without changes to the culture, it is quite clear where the future of IT will be-- right next to the janitors of today. Cleaning services are often used over an in house staff; IT services will be similar and in many places they are at least partially.

Internet services (AKA the naturally innocuous soft fluffy "Cloud") not only gives a false sense of stability/security, but it removes the related support services. No longer pay per-computer fees or deal with a site license, just subscribe and never deal with that again! It's like your cell phone you LOVE to get for free with your 3 year contract you gladly pay 4x as much for as your land line (which costs more to maintain.)

so what the article is saying is... (3, Interesting)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#43939347)

that the terminology will change again? that happens every several years anyway, more or less.

no crystal ball needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939357)

it's already happening..

it departments are becoming phone numbers to underpaid, overworked workers at call center sweat shops in asia that support outsourced services hosted oversold, under-supported, exploitable, hackable, and snoopable "clouds"

Re:no crystal ball needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939495)

no thats today.

tomorrow those office will be closed and those jobs outsourced to the next tier down in countries.

most solutions provided will literally require voodoo and drums.

Google Apps (0)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about a year ago | (#43939375)

In my opinion, any business that depends on Google Apps will end up one of two ways.
A division of google.
Out of business.

Obviously it makes jobs redundant (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939385)

Moving to IaaS or SaaS solutions results in reduced labor costs. Yes you still need someone to administer those solutions, but you're cutting links out of the chain. With IaaS you no longer have someone managing a server room. With SaaS you no longer have a sys admin running and patching the OS. If that's all you do, then there's a good chance you're going to be made redundant by someone over at Google or Amazon or Microsoft who is doing your job for thousands of companies instead of a single company.

Learn IaaS and SaaS solutions or hope you have enough saved to retire.

COBAL on IPv6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939389)

5 years is from now it will be about time to migrate the COBAL servers to IPv6 right? We need to keep the reachable!

Re:COBAL on IPv6 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939583)

I'm having trouble here. COmmon Business... Awesome Language?

What SHOULD happen with IT (3, Interesting)

houbou (1097327) | about a year ago | (#43939407)

A company whose IT is run in silos usually end up paying more for less. That being said, IT should become a service unto itself. Small and Medium size companies should be able to get third parties into an agreement. I think that this makes more sense. Even when it comes down to matters of security, these companies can ensure they get a properly bonded and vetted IT support team as a third party via contract.

Re:What SHOULD happen with IT (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#43939689)

Hell, just the competition would be a good thing. IT organizations are supposed to be service organizations, but very, very few actually act like one.

Re:What SHOULD happen with IT (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43939815)

that's because the user base doesn't like the answer. they just want a yes man and someone to blame when things go wrong with their app or what ever they want to bring into the environment. or they want someone to spend days customizing something just for their OCD personality

Re:What SHOULD happen with IT (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#43940449)

Go price out that stuff with real SLAs and see what you find. At that point we found real employees you can fire are cheaper.

What Will IT Departments Look Like In 5 Years? (0)

alexgieg (948359) | about a year ago | (#43939409)

A: Empty.

Re:What Will IT Departments Look Like In 5 Years? (1)

jon3k (691256) | about a year ago | (#43939727)

Still need support staff. People still need help with devices, need the network functioning so they can get to their "cloud apps". People need their IP Telephone configured or fixed. The problem is IT will still be 20 or 30 different integrated services and products and you need someone to integrate and provide front end support. Or do you just tell your employee, here's a list of 30 vendors, just use this handy dandy reference chart to know who to call.

Consurmerization is not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939425)

Consumerization and what the end users are using to access corporate data has little to do with the backend systems.

MS Exchange, Sharepoint, document management systems, backups systems, web servers, "content" systems, video/audio systems, portals, phone systems etc are not running on someones handheld or a small server someone is running under their desk. Very few people in the business (even people in the support levels of IT) have very little idea how complex those systems are and the engineering that goes into to keeping them running efficiently. Most companies think if you are not out walking around showing your face fixing a printer for someone, you must not be useful or doing anything.

Infrastructure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939437)

I work in a public school, so my perspective is somewhat screwed up...

That said, I see our department focused more on infrastructure in 5 years (i.e. cabling, switches, routers, wireless AP's, etc.). The PC's, the servers, the applications...they're all moving to the cloud for us. And with BYOD proliferating, the devices are privately owned, not school owned. With the advent of Google Apps for Education and other SaaS the students and staff share electronic documents rather than print them, so printer use and support has even declined.

Same as they do now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939443)

A office tucked away in some forgotten corner of the office, piled high with the decaying remains of numerous upgrade projects and spare parts. A couple bored men dressed in business casual spend their days browsing Slashdot on suspiciously well-built computers. Occasionally one answers his phone for a short conversation that sounds remarkably like "is it plugged in?"

IT hasn't changed that much in 13 years (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43939461)

that i have been doing it
we still have servers, we still have data centers. we still have people trying to take our data and processes and lock it up for themselves. except now its called "the cloud"

in the 1990's we had application service providers that rented out virtual desktops in the days of $2000 desktop PC's. these failed and they were ebaying their EMC and Cisco gear for years.
now we have "the cloud" which does pretty much the same thing. the cloud is awesome for smaller companies like this AMAG company with only 189 people. large companies still have servers and data centers. I don't know where it is but at some point in your employee count it makes sense to run your own infrastructure rather than rent it out. the cloud and renting can actually be a lot more expensive than buying your own hardware which is fairly cheap.

google apps are nice but Exchange does things that gmail cannot do

Why would it change? (2)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about a year ago | (#43939475)

The technology will change but I don't see the administrator changing. Just like modern code monkeys mirror there counter parts from 30 years ago, modern day administrators mirrors the old guys who started networking. The system doesn't change, the technology does.

Not nearly as complicated as they think (4, Insightful)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year ago | (#43939481)

This isn't nearly as complicated as the self-interested "consultants" are making it out to be. Strip away the marketdroid-speak and the cloud-hype verbiage, and all it's really saying is that IT will have to pay more attention to actual business needs. Anyone with their eyes open has already known that for years.

Yes, the stereotypical BOFH doesn't have much of a future. Good riddance. In fact, BOFHs are already almost extinct, because they don't add much value to the business. Successful companies work with IT to find ways that IT resources can be used to make the company better and more productive, rather than having IT as a roadblock or setting them up as the "computer janitors". You don't really need an expensive consultant to tell you any of this (though in poorly-run companies, you might need one to get the management to listen).

Re:Not nearly as complicated as they think (1)

nine-times (778537) | about a year ago | (#43940185)

...all it's really saying is that IT will have to pay more attention to actual business needs. Anyone with their eyes open has already known that for years.

It's always been the case. There was just a period when computers themselves were just so overhyped that people treated them as something more than "a means to serve business needs."

Yes, the stereotypical BOFH doesn't have much of a future.

Depends. Do you mean "computer janitors"? Then yes, there is a future. People make the mistake of thinking, "Oh, you use Google Apps and then you don't need IT people because you don't have servers." Wrong. You've substituted one problem for another. You don't need a computer janitor watching over your internal server anymore, but now you need someone to help you set up and configure the Google Apps stuff, diagnose problems with it, train users, etc. And you still need desktop support. There's still no free lunch. However, if by "BOFH" you mean rude and problematic "computer janitors" who aren't very good at their jobs, then yes, there's no future there.

Re:Not nearly as complicated as they think (1)

swb (14022) | about a year ago | (#43940333)

...and all it's really saying is that IT will have to pay more attention to actual business needs.

This gripe has been made about IT since the mainframe age. System outages, deleted files, disk quotas, delayed reports, no card decks, not loading my tape -- just switch the technology to whatever is current, and the same complaints will be made about IT.

The reverse complaints are made both about the business "leaders" and the end users.

End user complaints are usually just that -- complaints. Some are quality of service gripes that may or not be legitimate, but some of it is just people who want to do their own thing because its most expedient for them and moves their ball ahead.

IT gripes about the business leadership is more legitimate -- if business leadership actually worked with IT to develop solutions instead of simply demanding resources or outcomes without engagement over goals and processes they would find IT paying more attention to what the business needs are.

Let me introduce you to my System/360.... (5, Insightful)

trims (10010) | about a year ago | (#43939483)

Large corporate environments chance at a glacial speed. If anything, they merely add, never subtract - the proportion of Fortune 1000 companies which have mission-critical mainframes is close to 100%, as it has been for the past 50 years. Similarly, pretty much all of them still have a VAX or AS/400 similar mini-computer running something critical. The waves of consultant-pushed fads wash over these institutions with virtually no effect. They all run small "incubator" tech-evalutation groups so they can sort out which of the new tech is likely to produce useful ROI, but the actual adoption rates of these new techs is very slow.

Mid-sized companies are pretty similar, though they're a bit more aggressive with dumping older technology. They don't generally replace it with cutting edge stuff, though, since that's a huge risk they don't want to take. Pretty much every "tech upgrade" I've ever seen in this space is replacing a 30-year-old setup with a design which first showed up a decade before. Mid-sized companies go for solidly-proven tech.

Little companies are where the most change happens, for the good and bad. The bad side is that many small companies don't have the expertise to handle the adoption of new processes and tech properly, and thus screw it all up, and then kill the company. I've seen this happen at both small tech AND non-tech companies, where an insufficiently funded/staffed/knowledgable IT "department" killed the company. Literally. The good is that small companies are where the experimentation happens, and, particularly in tech-oriented ones, it's where the next wave of computing is really prototyped then refined.

The general answer to the article is that any sane company's IT department will look 90% identical to what it is now in 10 years, and even in 50 years will almost certainly still be at least 50% identical. For those able to handle the risk, things will chance on a decade-by-decade basis; but, the reality is, those companies will either have died or turned into mature (and risk adverse) companies by then. So, while the small company space is a place of rapid change in IT, at a specific company, a period of rapid evolution will be followed either by death of the company, or evolution to the long-term stability type.

The short of it is: NEVER trust a consultant trying to predict the future for you. Particularly if they're extrapolating on "new" tech.

Antique mini-computers (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about a year ago | (#43939701)

Similarly, pretty much all of them still have a VAX or AS/400 similar mini-computer running something critical

I'm a developer, not an administrator, so I know little of these early '80s mini-computers of which you speak. However, their continued use is kind of interesting to me. Is it difficult to fix or replace these machines if they break? And if so, would it be possible/useful for a vendor to port these legacy OSes to run in a virtual machine on today's commodity hardware? Obviously such a port would be costly, but I wonder which costs less -- keeping a line of mini-computers in low-volume production, or porting the whole legacy OS to today's hardware? (The third possibility is to retire the antique system, but if that has not already been done, presumably it's because the cost of migration is worse than the risk of the system going toes-up some day.)

Re:Antique mini-computers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939875)

The AS/400 series is from IBM, while the VAX was from Digital (DEC). DEC is now part of HP. Both have migration paths to better hardware, though I expect the VAX architecture to die shortly.

Emulating the OS/400 operating system is entirely possible on other IBM hardware, but NOT on commodity hardware. Porting an app from OS/400 is pretty much a non-starter; rewriting from scratch is simpler if you want to move to Linux (or the like).

VAX typically ran VMS, and that's still around, running primarily on select HP hardware (once again, NOT commodity hardware). Architecturally, VAX emulators for x64 exist, but I don't know of too many commercial implementations. Porting VMS apps to something else is *much* simpler than OS/400, but, again, rewriting from scratch is probably a better idea.

There still is a lucrative market for upgrades and replacement machines for both, though it's slowly dying. IBM is going for the "AS/400 on a PCI card" route so you can run an AS/400 inside a System/X. I'm not really sure what HP plans to do, but I suspect that the VAX/VMS line will die by the end of the decade.

Re:Let me introduce you to my System/360.... (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about a year ago | (#43939899)

"The short of it is: NEVER trust a consultant trying to predict the future for you. Particularly if they're extrapolating on "new" tech."

I think it's a good idea to never trust ANYONE trying to predict the future for you. It doesn't matter if they're paid consultants or in-house IT monkeys or Miss Cleo herself.

Re:Let me introduce you to my System/360.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940149)

Large corporate environments chance at a glacial speed......Similarly, pretty much all of them still have a VAX or AS/400 similar mini-computer running something critical.

I bet in 5 years IT departments will be scrambling to implement IPv6 on some of these old systems. Or doing some sort of NAT behind IPv6 to accommodate their inability to use the new addressing. I bet a lot of these obscure little systems are going to break on the changeover, leaving people scrambling.

Re:Let me introduce you to my System/360.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43940357)

It's a non-issue.

IPv4 to v6 NATing is trivial to implement at the network core.

Even if that weren't the case, these legacy systems very, very seldom have any requirement to talk to the outside world. They occasionally talk to internal systems, and very occasionally talk to other legacy systems in other companies, mostly through direct leased-line comms.

Really, it won't have any impact at all. Especially since virtually no large organization will use internal IPv6 as the primary addressing scheme for several more decades.

there is a new tech hype every year (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#43939515)

noticed it around 2004. that year IM was hyped like crazy in the Enterprise tech media. it was going to replace email. dozens of IM products were released that year. come next year no one cared about it.

the cloud thing seems to have lasted longer but no one seems to know exactly what it is. at first the public cloud was going kill corporate IT and everyone was going to outsource everything for a low monthly payment. the next year people figured out it was BS so they made up the private cloud label. suddenly every server in your datacenter is part of this cloud thingy. services are provisioned magically and no need to worry about lack of CPU/RAM or IO. you just provision as you need.

now its BYOD. some companies will emrace it, others won't. depends on the organization and the line of business.

but ignore the hype in the media. it changes every year depending on what is being shown at the trade shows

Re:there is a new tech hype every year (1)

xclr8r (658786) | about a year ago | (#43939705)

I have the second graph in this article posted outside my door. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle [wikipedia.org]

The only reason we use email anymore... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939863)

...is to ensure a "paper trail" for management and formal communications. Everyone loves to IM.

More Warehouses (3, Interesting)

SuilAmhain (2819677) | about a year ago | (#43939521)

more centralised management of everything.

Why have three DBAs managing a single database when you can have 10 managing a 1,000?

Managed print services, Office online, more or less disposable laptops, cloud email, cloud active directory services etc.. etc...

There are too many people doing the jobs only a few are really needed for.
I think this centralisation will be bloody unfortunate for most of us.

We'll be Installing 2012 Stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939539)

We're just now finishing our upgrades to SQL Server 2008, so I imagine five years from now we'll be finishing upgrading to 2012.

There are suprising and disturbing parallels (4, Interesting)

StillNeedMoreCoffee (123989) | about a year ago | (#43939543)

Standardization and merger/monopoly are happening in IT and in business.

How many products do you see that do everything. We have a forms package that does work flow and web design, a document program that does workflow and web design, we have a messaging layer that does work flow and web design. Each trying to capture the entire business. We see it with hamburger chains and doughnut sellers going after Startbuck's market. Now we see McDonalds going after Dairy Queens market and big box discount stores going after the Grocery chain market.

Everyone wants to be a one stop shop. Companies are getting there by buying up smaller companies and over and over.

The problem is the actual software developers will have fewer and fewer jobs for real development with few and fewer companies providing software.

Already our company is into buying packages and thinking they can save money by plugging everything together instead of targeted custom development.

The IT people of the future (if this trend continues) will be glorified plumbers. A few developers will make the design decision we will all have to live with.

Unless of course we start to recognize that this may not be the most cost effective way to do things, or that this dumbing down of jobs is bad overall for the society and we might see some anti-trust going on with breaking up of the swelling blobs of companies and packages and a new leaner meaner model emerging.

    Who knows?

Have you seen Office Space? (1)

tphb (181551) | about a year ago | (#43939633)

IT departments will look like that. IT is just one big TPS forever.

My bold predictions (5, Funny)

SoupIsGood Food (1179) | about a year ago | (#43939655)

What will the IT department look like in five years?

Well, there's going to be the guy with the beard and suspenders, and the guy with the "wacky" sense of humor, and they may be the same guy. Then you're going to have the angry guy who seems to know how to do only one thing, but it's something way important, and he does it incredibly well. Then there's the woman who stares at you blankly whenever you talk to her, but seems to have absorbed what you were trying to say anyhow. You will also have the really smart guy who can't seem to get any aspect of his life together, but seems to know everything about everything if you need to ask him anything. There's going to be the very stylish and personable guy who calls you "broham", and it's going to drive you nuts when it turns out he's pretty good at his job, because no fair, right? And the very nice person who can't figure out how to work the badge reader, nevermind anything he's supposed to be working on, but everyone likes him anyway. There's also going to be a kid fresh out of college who's sure she knows how everything works, and will break everything at least once trying to prove it, usually when your users are busiest. You will send her out to look for a wireless cable tester at least once, and then tell her it's an app she can download, she should search for it on google. Then there's the guy who never seems to be at his desk, never answers the phone and is never available in IM, but all his tickets get resolved with no follow up customer complaints. And there's also the woman who will do whatever a customer wants, no matter how stupid, and everyone hates her. Plus, everyone will fly jet-packs to work.

He's full of it (1)

kilodelta (843627) | about a year ago | (#43939723)

Because not for anything if you want to use Outlook to get you gmail it's simple as gmail does IMAP! The horrors! Pretty easy to setup on my phone too. And I'm an older I.T. worker.

Re:He's full of it (1)

Todd Knarr (15451) | about a year ago | (#43940187)

Unless of course the admins have turned IMAP support off. You can do that, you know.

My reason for wanting a "real" e-mail client is simple: I want local copies of e-mail that aren't subject to corporate deletion policies and that won't be subject to going away if the company decides to change e-mail providers. If it's HR stuff related to my job, I do not want it to disappear until at least 7 years after I've left that job. If it's stuff like project requirements and the discussion that led to them, I want it filed and retained until the project in question is decommissioned (there's copies in the documentation for the project, but I want my copies where I can get them regardless of what anyone's done to the official documentation). Google's great and all, but e-mail there is at the mercy of the admins and of course if the company decides to not use Google anymore there's the issue of getting all the e-mail out before it goes away.

VMs and streaming apps as a service everywhere (1)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | about a year ago | (#43939841)

Expect to rent most of your software just like you pay for Netflix. Rents might be low, but you'll pay.

And expect surveillance as a service too. Interestingly, everyone used to think I was a conspiracy nut when when I told them this.

I hate being right.

Re:VMs and streaming apps as a service everywhere (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43939905)

Everyone is eventually right, even conspiracy nuts.

Can't talk, being outsourced... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939867)

... nuff said.

Come on (5, Interesting)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year ago | (#43939879)

It will look exactly like they do today.

I walked by our IT department today and it looked exactly like they did 15 years ago at any company I worked at. A bunch of open PC's with parts and wires dangling out of them, a bunch of server racks in the never ending process of being upgraded, a bunch of obsolete parts strewn over shelves and desks, boxes of wires old keyboards and mice in the corner, old monitors and brick thick laptops that once cost a fortune now collecting dust because nobody knows how to get rid of them.

The actual server room is a way too cold room filled with racks of mismatched components from HP and Dell and homegrown solutions humming noisily away, the acrid smell of ozone and general neglect filling the air.

The eclectic collection of socially challenged uber-nerds that usually fill IT department staff, walking around with whatever phone was released just last week and squirreling all the best workstation tech for themselves..

You can walk into any "enterprise" IT department and see the exact same thing, over and over and over again.

All the "cloud" has done for the world is given consumers a place to store pictures of their cat's and access to music they would have otherwise (or already have) stolen. It has allowed people with a guilty conscience to stream movies and TV shows on demand for a low monthly fee.

For enterprise, Cloud is just another buzzword that IT managers love to throw around but the non-IT corporate execs will never let their company's intellectual property reside on some external 3rd party storage server.

All that will change is that in 5 years that room full of shitty server components will be called the "cloud" room, and no longer the "server" room us ol' timers call it. Every enterprise will try and build their own local "cloud" to try and remain hip to the lingo of the era.

Of course in 5 years nobody will use the terminology "Cloud" anymore. Either it will become Cloud 2.0 or Web Infinity or some kind of shit like that.

But the IT department will remain steadfast and unchanged.

A better question might be: (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43939887)

In 5 years: What's an IT department?

Fewer employees, bigger bonuses (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43939893)

Every dollar consumed by a "resource" is a dollar an executive doesn't get as a bonus. First in-house business programming was dumped for vertical-market packages. The AS/400s are gone, the departmental programs are gone. The people who did it got big bonuses, and they're gone, leaving whoever is there now to pick up the pieces and hire consultants for Lawson, Hogan, and a million other vertical-market packages you've never heard of. The next frontier will be outsourcing to the cloud. I saw yesterday that Amazon is offering database access as a service - no need to employ that SQL Server DBA. The DBA is the one person management hasn't figured out how to get rid of, since most vertical-market packages use it. When a manager thinks this through, and realizes the potential to reduce headcount, the vendors of vertical-market packages will be pressured to use cloud databases. I see this as the next frontier. Just as there are too many IT guys chasing too few jobs now, in 5 years there will be too many SQL Server DBAs chasing too few jobs.

So the future looks like today, only moreso - CONSOLIDATION. A few big datacenter players will achieve an economy of scale and require very few employees to manage very many servers. The same will be true for DBAs - once a DBA has tuned a database for a vertical-market package, the same tuning can be used over and over. Programming in general will be consolidated with vertical-market vendors, who need a few domain experts and not much else.

I see IT shrinking until it doesn't exist as a separate entity. With disposable technology, you don't need repairs done. Buildings are already wired for networking. Support almost doesn't exist any longer in a BYOD world.

The days of a career in IT or software development may be coming to an end in 5 years.

Just look around (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#43939999)

Now, add 5 years of mold growth to the cioffee pot and you've got it.

Forecast: cloudy (2)

jandersen (462034) | about a year ago | (#43940131)

At the moment it seems to me that many companies are moving things into the cloud, and often the traditional IT department is outsourced at the same time - or perhaps a little bit later. So, in 5 years a lot of IT departments will look rather empty.

The reason behind this is that the idea about putting things in the cloud looks compelling, since it promises things like savings and convenience. And the outsourcing will happen, because once your stuff is in the cloud, it will be administered remotely anyway, using tools like Chef or Puppet, so they might as well save on expensive on-shore staff.

This strategy may well backfire, though. When you outsource, you may be giving away your core assets - your data - to an unknown entity, in the hope that a contract will be all that is required to make it work. To me it looks a bit like winging it on a prayer.

I am not trying to spread unreasonable FUD here, but there are some real issues that should be thought through by those in charge. Regrettably, even quite clever people somehow tend to distrust the persons they know well, while being perfectly willing to trust a complete stranger.

More like ten years, but... (1)

wcrowe (94389) | about a year ago | (#43940155)

I don't know that they will look that different in five years. In ten years or so I think IT departments might not exist at all. The networking types will be in the maintenance department. Other departments will have their own "analysts", or whatever, who will handle the more intricate data integration issues. Software and storage will be leased and will be offsite. Custom programming, as we traditionally understand it, will be practically unheard of. Any special apps will be created by the aforementioned "analysts".

At any rate, I intend to be retired by then. It is up to the next generation to decide how they want to work.

I can feel it... (5, Funny)

neurogeneticist (1631367) | about a year ago | (#43940201)

Linux on every desktop.

IT won't be there in 5 years (3, Interesting)

ka9dgx (72702) | about a year ago | (#43940381)

I spent 15 years being the IT staff for a small marketing company. Last November they decided to save a ton of money and outsource IT, which is working ok for them. They have some issues which will now never be resolved (like form letters with wrong contact names hard-coded into them), but on the whole they can work with the slowly self-crippling mess they have. It's worth the hassle for the savings, and the cheaper, outsourcing people will at least keep it running.

For them, it's all about money... and they aren't unique by any stretch. The days of the small IT shop, or the lone IT guy are fast coming to an end. Microsoft's push to kill the PC (aka Windows 8) isn't helping matters either.

I'll probably end up doing something in manufacturing or agriculture instead of IT now. It'll be fun and interesting, I'm sure.

It depends ... (1)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#43940385)

... on your business model. If your knowledge and business rules are encoded within enterprise apps and they are core competencies, you will probably opt to keep some IT infrastructure to yourself. On the other hand, if its all standard process stuff, why not outsource it?

If you derive some strategic advantage over your competition from your processes, you will want to keep those close to your management chain. If your processes are standard things like payroll, a public web page, etc. then you derive little advantage by rolling your own. Let the consultants come in and lay their standard template on your organization. You can benefit from their broader view of your markets as well as best business practices in general.

IMO, the biggest mistake that companies make is to invite the consultants in with the idea that they will be adapting your proprietary process knowledge to some application service. They might smile and nod a lot when you tell them what you want. But in the end, their job is to convince you to adopt the standard process already encoded into their product suite. Fight that and your SAP or Salesforce migration will fail miserably.

100% outsourced to cloud vendors (1)

charnov (183495) | about a year ago | (#43940395)

There won't be many in-house IT teams, anymore. You'll have a few severely overworked, stressed "DevOps" guys that do everything from printer maintenance to screaming at the cloud vendors, but no real in-house infrastructure.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>